Peter Newmark - Translation

You might also like

Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 10

NEWMARK:

Semantic and
Communicative
Translation

Prepared by: Norelie T. Antecristo


PETER NEWMARK
Was an English
professor of
translation at
the University
of Surrey.
Known work:
A Textbook of Translation
(1988)
Newmark departs from Nida’s
receptor-oriented line, feeling that
the success of equivalent effect is
‘illusory’.

Conflict of loyalties

gap between emphasis on source


and target language will always
remain as the overriding problem
in translation theory and practice
Semantic and
Communicative
Translation
Newmark’s Nida’s
Semantic
Formal equivalence
Translation

Communicative
Dynamic equivalence
Translation
Semantic Translation

Attempts to render, as closely as the semantic and


syntactic structures of the second language allow,
the exact contextual meaning of the original.

communicative Translation

Attempts to produce on its readers an effect as


close as possible to that obtained on the readers of
the original.
Example:
Source text She sleeps like an oil.
Semantic Translation

• Napakahimbing niyang matulog.


• Tulog na tulog siya kung matulog.

Communicative Translation

• Para siyang mantika kung matulog.


Semantic
VS Literal
Translation Translation

Connotative Word for word


meaning

Metaphors

EXAMPLE ST: Tengang kawali

ST: Gapabungol-bungol LT: Dalunggang kalaha

ST: pretending not to hear LT: Ear frying pan


Semantic Communicative
Parameter
translation translation
Focus on the thought
processes of the transmitter Subjective, TT reader
Transmitter/ as an individual; should only focused, oriented towards
addressee focus help TT reader with a specific language and
connotations if they are a culture
crucial part of message

Remains within the SL Transfers foreign elements


Culture
culture into the TL culture

Not fixed in any time or


Ephemeral and rooted in
local space; translation
Time and origin its own contemporary
needs to be done anew with
context
every generation
Relation to ST Always ‘inferior’ to ST May be 'better' than the
ST;
If ST language norms
Respect for the form of the
deviate, then this must be
Use of form of SL SL, but overriding
replicated in TT; ‘loyalty’
‘loyalty’ to TL norms
to ST author
Smoother, simpler, dearer,
More complex, awkward,
more direct, more
Form of TL detailed, concentrated;
conventional; tendency to
tendency to overtranslate
undertranslate
For the vast majority of
For serious literature,
texts, e.g. non-literary
autobiography, ‘personal
writing, technical and
Appropriateness effusion’, any important
informative texts,
political (or other)
publicity, standardized
statement
types, popular fiction

Accuracy of
Accuracy of reproduction
Criterion forevaluation communication of ST
of the significance of ST
message in TT

You might also like